Changes between Version 84 and Version 85 of ippToPsps

Timestamp:

May 18, 2010, 4:08:17 PM (16 years ago)

Author:

rhenders

Comment:

--

ippToPsps

@@ -124 +124 @@
 = Recovery system design =
 
-Currently, the IPP to PSPS interface is a 'one-way' system. Batches are created by {{{ippToPsps}}} and posted on an IPP instance of the datastore. These batches are collected by the {{{DXLayer}}} on the PSPS side. The IPP urgently requires some feedback from PSPS to determine which batches have succeeded and which have failed (and why they failed). With this information data can be either deleted or regenerated accordingly. This is important simply because, with such large data volumes, we cannot afford the high levels of redundancy currently in place. At present, for a given batch, the following copies exist within the pipeline:
+Currently, the IPP to PSPS interface is a 'one-way' system. Batches are created by {{{ippToPsps}}} and posted on an IPP instance of the datastore. These batches are collected by the {{{DXLayer}}} on the PSPS side and sent on to the ODM. The IPP urgently requires some feedback from PSPS to determine which batches have succeeded and which have failed (and why they failed). With this information, data can be either deleted or regenerated accordingly. This is important simply because, with such large data volumes, we cannot afford the high levels of redundancy currently in place. At present, for a given batch, the following copies exist within the pipeline:
 
  - a copy exists on the IPP cluster after generation by ippToPsps program
@@ -131 +131 @@
  - the {{{DXLayer}}} also keeps a copy of these (larger) csv files
 
-We therefore need to quickly implement the basic framework of a feedback loop such that the IPP can quickly learn if a given batch has been successfully merged into the PSPS database or not. This will enable it to safely delete the data files and remove the copy from the datastore. This will also form the basis for a more comprehensive recovery system, to be developed at a future date. 
+We therefore need to quickly implement the basic framework of a feedback loop so that the IPP can quickly learn if a given batch has been successfully merged into the PSPS database or not. This will enable it to safely delete the data files and remove the copy from the datastore. This will also form the basis for a more comprehensive recovery system, to be developed at a future date. 
 
 == Previous design ==
@@ -156 +156 @@
 
 
-Previously, Conrad and I had discussed a design whereby a second datastore instance was utilized, this time on the PSPS cluster. The {{{DXLayer}}} would act as the 'middle-man', polling the ODM for updates on loading progress, then posting the results on the PSPS datastore for the IPP. Polling this, {{{ippToPsps}}} could acquire a list of batches it knows are safe to be discarded. Simultaneously, the {{{DXLayer}}} could delete its copies of the same redundant data.
+Previously, Conrad and I had discussed a design whereby a second datastore instance would be utilized, this time on the PSPS cluster. The {{{DXLayer}}} would act as the 'middle-man', polling the ODM for updates on loading progress, then posting the results on the PSPS datastore for the IPP to consume. Polling this, {{{ippToPsps}}} could acquire a list of batches it knows are safe to be discarded. Simultaneously, the {{{DXLayer}}} could delete its copies of the same redundant data.
 
 The update placed on the PSPS datastore could take the form of an XML file. At first this would simply detail those files it is safe to delete, but could evolve into a more complex recovery report, i.e. which batches failed, and what is required to be done by the IPP.